eburger68

santiagoace57: I can't say what happened, because I'm not sitting in front of your PC. I can tell you that the F-14 and Linebacker '75 campaign were not left out. If they had been, someone else would have reported it long before now. Indeed, I would have discovered it myself quite some time ago. Eric Howes

santiagoace57: If the new campaigns and F-14s are not showing up in game, then you didn't install the mod correctly. Eric Howes

Folks: The speech files used for each service are specified in the NATIONS.INI (found in \Flight, if you've unpacked it from the MissionData001.CAT). The relevant lines for the USAF (RedCrown) and USN (Hawkeye) are: SpeechFile=USAFSpeech.cat SpeechTextFile=USAFSpeechText.cat SpeechFile=SpeechUSN.cat SpeechTextFile=SpeechTextUSN.cat Keep in mind that the SpeechUSN.CAT has a few more lines of speech to cover carrier operations (mainly approach/landing), so if you use RedCrown (USAFSpeech.CAT), you'll be missing recorded voiceovers for some speech used when flying naval aircraft. Eric Howes

Paul: The EAF decals are missing from this package. Could you either upload them here or update the download package? Thanks, Eric Howes

JMBalestre: You wrote: One might as well say: there is not super super solid evidence that we are not all being secretly controlled by the lizard people from outer space, in the same sense that there is not any evidence super super solid that tell us that we are being secretly controlled by the outer space lizard people. But that confuses the burden of proof and falsely presumes the two assertions make for two equally plausible theories or accounts. And there are not two equally plausible theories, with the matter of choosing between them simply a matter of personal whim or belief. There is one theory that has been offered with no clear supporting evidence to support it and plenty of reason to doubt it. Without such evidence the logical conclusion is that it didn't happen. You then wrote: You already answered this question yourself when you pointed out in an earlier post that militaries and governments do lie and spread misinformation when it is in their own interest. And, indeed, the entire case made for this allegedly successful attack is based on the assumption that the UK government lied and has continued to lie about the events of that day in 1982. But, again, the burden isn't on the UK government or anyone else to prove that the Invincible didn't suffer battle damage from that attack; it is on those who assert that it did. Eric Howes

JMBalestre: You wrote: But there were over 1000 men who would have had to keep quiet -- for over thirty years. And the families of the dead and wounded (not likely you hit a ship, even a large one, with an Exocet and multiple bombs without causing at least some casualties). And the personnel of any shipyard where repairs were made (or the ship rebuilt) which, if done in the Mississippi (as some theories allege) would necessarily involve the surrounding community as well as U.S. government officials. And members of the British government and the MoD. And amongst all of these thousands of people, both civilian and military, not one cracked after thirty years? Not a single person? No one with ill will towards the Thatcher administration or outrage at the alleged cover-up? And why would the British government be so concerned about apparently minor battle damage to the Invincible after dealing with much more devastating attacks on other ships as well as widespread outrage at the sinking of the Belgrano? Simply not believable. And not possible either, given that we know how the attempt to hush the Dasher sinking failed so miserably. As for the long passage in Spanish that you posted, I looked through it -- it's mainly a rehashing of alleged events. Not a shred of concrete evidence or eyewitness testimony offered save for the mention of the name of one nurse, who was reportedly traumatized by treating casualties while aboard Invincible which (in the language of the original) "presumably" came from "attacks by Argentine aircraft during the days of the conflict." Pretty thin. I'm sorry, but if anyone wants to claim that this attack did score direct hits on Invincible, then the burden is squarely on them to provide evidence for it. Such evidence ought to be abundant and easy to find, given the nature of the alleged event. And so far, they have offered none. Eric Howes

JMBalestre: The problem is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the attack, which might well have been mounted, actually damaged the Invincible. Two pilots might have died, but that in itself does not speak to any damage to the Invincible. That all the Exocets possessed by Argentina at the start of the war were expended also fails to prove that any damage was done to the Invincible. As for the Invincible being the last to return, that again provides no direct evidence of any damage to the ship. Moreover, by all accounts the Invincible stayed behind in the South Atlantic to provide protection for the islands until relieved in August by the Illustrious (the British no doubt being eager not to repeat the mistake of leaving the islands undefended). And the "signals of having suffered a huge repair" -- where is the account coming from? Please provide a link or reference, because every account that I can find online from eyewitnesses of the return has the ship looking "smart" and undamaged. Photos included in this video here: If the ship had been hit by the Exocet and bombs, it surely would have suffered major damage and, undoubtedly, numerous casualties. Yet in the 32 years since this alleged attack none of the one thousand crew members have reported this damage. None of the families of those killed or wounded have spoken up. At least none that I'm aware of. And despite the ship allegedly having undergone major repairs (or even being rebuilt from scratch according to some conspiracy theorists), there have been no reliable witnesses from the shipyard that performed these repairs (which was where?) or among the hundreds or even thousands people who would have been involved in such an effort. And please don't tell us about the HMS Dasher, whose sinking in 1943 the British apparently did try to hush up. That effort failed miserably for precisely the same reasons that any effort to cover up major damage to the Invincible would have failed. And there would have been plenty of folks in Britain with plenty of motivation to expose such a cover-up. The Thatcher government was a controversial one with plenty of determined political enemies who would not have hesitated to exploit an opportunity to blacken Thatcher's major accomplishment, esp. heading in to the general election of 1983. No, fallenphoenix1986 is correct: the only evidence offered for the attack and its alleged success is the testimony of a few pilots. And that testimony is simply uncorroborated by any other eyewitnesses or other evidence that surely would have resulted from a successful attack. I think what we're dealing with here is a cherished national myth that acts for some a salve to wounded national pride. The mistake is assume that the British would have been as concerned with covering up such an attack (after dealing already with the fallout from the sinking of the Belgrano as well as the loss of several Royal Navy ships, events which shocked the British public) as others are interested in proving that it really happened. Eric Howes

JMBalestre: Interesting mission. But why does the Invincible have no escorts or even a destroyer screen? How about Harriers flying CAP? Eric Howes

Folks: I am indeed finishing up an update for NF5. It will be delivered as a separate download, though. Users won't have to re-download all eight NF5 archives just to get the update. So, if you wanted to install NF5 now, there's no reason to hold back -- you will not have to re-download at some point in the near future. Eric Howes

igancioc91: Thanks, but could I make a few suggestions? First, please include a ReadMe -- it's a mandatory component of all uploads here. See: http://combatace.com/topic/60088-a-reminder-before-you-upload-a-mod/ Second, could I persuade you not to make A-Team downloads a mandatory part of your installs? Not all CA members have access to A-Team files, so if you make them default components of your mods, you've lost a significant chunk of your audience. Third, instead of rolling out these target area mods one at a time, why not wait until you finished with them all, then release a complete mod that includes all the necessary components. Easier for everyone involved, and you don't have to point users to another download just to get a TYPES.INI. Finally, it might be wise to include a warning that these target area mods could be incompatible with other mods. If users replace the Port Said and Suez target areas in the 48-58 IsraelME terrain, for example, they're going to stomp all over plenty of other existing changes and updates to those target areas, some of which might be custom-tailored to the campaigns in that mod. Eric Howes

Gunrunner: The download you're looking for is at Check-Six -- or was at one time. It's an RA-5C package uploaded by Rhugouvi. He credits MontyCZ for the model (which is different from Julhelm's) and Paul Nortress for the one skin included with the package. He writes: So, credit for those would go to Rhugouvi, if I'm interpreting that correctly. ReadMe does not specify any restrictions on use, noting only: Eric Howes

arthur66: Nope. Eric Howes

Emp_Palpatine: The screens aren't determined by the mod. They're determined by the particular .EXE that you use to run the mod. Eric Howes

russouk2004: Thanks for the information. I will update the ReadMe accordingly. Eric Howes

Emp_Palpatine: Yes, you could. I would still recommend a clean install. Eric Howes

Folks: This mod has been updated today (2 May 2014). The changes consist mainly of tweaks and fixes for various aircraft. The mod does now use the Carrier Deck Illumination Package released not too long ago by Fubar512 & Migbuster. If you grab this updated version, don't forget to snag the second part as well: http://combatace.com/files/file/13987-operation-tainted-cigar-for-sf2-part-2-of-2/ Eric Howes

Folks: This mod has been updated today (2 May 2014). The changes are, for the most part, minor: mainly tweaks and fixes for various aircraft. This update does add the Skyraider AEW (Guppy) that was recently released as well as support for the S-199 and Spitfire 22 that were included in DLC 28 & DLC 29. If you download this updated version, don't forget to grab the second part as well: http://combatace.com/files/file/13757-48-56-exp-1-add-on-redux-part-2-of-2/ Eric Howes

Folks: This mod has been updated (2 May 2014). The updates included are minor, for the most part: mainly tweaks and updates to various aircraft and ships along with a handful of new skins for two aircraft (A-4P and Mirage IIIEA). Eric Howes

daddyairplanes: A few of us do, yes. Many are quite useful. Some are even entertaining and illuminating. I'm a big fan of ReadMes. Your post reminds me that I should let you know I haven't forgotten about those E-3 skins for NF5. When I started a credits section tonight for the NF5 update, yours was the first name to go down. Eric Howes

Folks: Once again I find myself at the stage where I'm wrapping up work on some things that I will be uploading to CombatAce. This time it's a round of updates for most of the major "all-in-one" mods that I maintain. And I am reminded once again why I dread this particular stage of work. For now is the time to put together a ReadMe with a proper credits section. Why do I dread putting together a credits section? Is it because I am constitutionally stingy about acknowledging the work and contributions of others? Quite the contrary. I am eager to give you, the modders -- the skinners, model makers, and INI editors -- all the credit you so richly deserve. And do it I will. So, why do I loathe this particular task? The answer is quite simple: because so many of you modders make it so difficult to give you the credit you deserve. How could that be? The answer is quite simple: I can't figure out who you are. Which leads to my humble request to modders here at CombatAce: People, please, for the love of god, would you please put your name in the ReadMe? I want to give you credit for the work you've labored on and so generously shared with the rest of us. I'm trying to give you credit. I'm desperate to give you credit. But when I am forced to go digging through the Downloads section here, drilling down through categories and scrolling through page after page of mods looking for that upload from you where you might have once, if only fleetingly revealed your identity only to dart back into the shadows, the window across the room from me starts to look mighty inviting. Esp. after I spend whole evenings taking the plunge again and again to excavate the Downloads section and dredge up old discussion topics long since forgotten in order to to sniff you out. OK, the above was a bit melodramatic. But you get the point. Please make it easy to give you and all those who might have worked with you the credit you deserve by including a proper ReadMe with your mod and including everyone's name -- esp. your own. There. I've said it. And now I must return to the Downloads section to dig some more. Eric Howes

Folks: Attached to this post is a little something I put together for my own personal reference use -- thought others might find it useful as well. It's a map of Europe (from where I don't remember) with all the Off Map Airbases used in the SF2NA Iceland terrain plotted. For reference purposes I've also included the four easternmost bases on the GermanyCE terrain (in western Poland) as well as two other northern RAF bases in addition to RAF Leuchars. Best, Eric Howes sf2na_air-bases.zip

Wrench: There's a working Movement.INI for the Iceland terrain in the SF2NA Expansion Pack. Eric Howes

Emp_Palpatine: Yes, you will see that occasionally. I've tried to put a damper on it by limiting radars and SAM ranges for those carriers, but it still happens on occasion. Same thing happens, by the way, with OpDarius. Short of stripping those ships of radars, I'm not sure what else can be done. Eric Howes

Vanguard1: I just checked the download for this update -- it's available and the download buttons are not greyed out. So, I have no idea what the problem might be. Perhaps a problem with your CA account or your browser? Eric Howes

Rends: One more find: the destroyed files for the Container_Ship and Tanker2 are missing. I've attached a RAR with them to this post. Eric Howes Ships_Destroyed.rar